F: P, a corpulent woman, hastened down the unlighted steps and made a misstep and injured. D failed to provide lighting the stairway or a handrail.
TC ruled in favor of P, D appealed.
I: Whether D’s negligence is the cause of P’s injury.
R: Where the negligence of the D greatly multiplies the chances of accident to the P, and is of a character naturally leading to its occurrence, the mere possibility that it might have happened without the negligence is not sufficient to break the chain of cause and effect between the negligence and the injury.
A: The court reasons that the mere possibility that a harm would have come to the plaintiff in the absence of the defendant’s negligence does not break the chain of causation between the negligence and the harm.
Co: the idea of fat woman invites to fall down the stairs